Clarification on Baiting

[Greg]

19 hours ago, GostHacked said:

The real question is, what is MODERATION doing about it?

As much as possible without seriously disrupting the discussions in the forums. 

As Charles said, don't feed the trolls - when you do, they're basically creating a situation where it then becomes more difficult for Charles and I to deal with them.

Also note, this is NOT a paid gig, we're not nor will we ever be, paid moderators; so you can't expect 100% coverage of all threads and topics.

17 hours ago, Argus said:

Except that in most cases there is no noticeable impact from such reporting.

 The presence of a report doesn't necessarily mean we agree with the report.

17 hours ago, Argus said:

So after a while you stop reporting except in the most obvious, blatant cases.

And that's all we really ask, other than Don't Feed the Trolls.

23 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Perhaps the problem is that people actually LIKE reading and responding to trolls.

Good comment - I agree 100%

A lot of members love to hate a particular member, whom they believe is a vicious and unrepentant troll. And consequently they often refuse to take the highroad and ignore that member's comments about them or their ideas.

Charles and I see it all the time. A member reports someone or something, and then immediately jumps into the thread with reckless abandon to disabuse the evil troll of any feelings of moral superiority... 

Once Charles and I show up at the scene, there is little, if anything, we can do rectify the situation.

[GostHacked]

26 minutes ago, Greg said:

As much as possible without seriously disrupting the discussions in the forums. 

As Charles said, don't feed the trolls - when you do, they're basically creating a situation where it then becomes more difficult for Charles and I to deal with them.

Incorrect ,  the problem is with the moderation not taking action on the reported troll posts in a consistent manner.  That's the real problem here.  I know full well many have reported the same people for the same thing, but nothing done about it. I know it's not an issue of what is defined as trolling, but when I post just like those other posters, I am the one that get's banned with a smarmy reply from moderation 'you are free to ignore the trolls'.   

I am not ONE bit surprised that this is still a problem on this board.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Greg said:

As much as possible without seriously disrupting the discussions in the forums. 

As Charles said, don't feed the trolls - when you do, they're basically creating a situation where it then becomes more difficult for Charles and I to deal with them.

Yes, yes, but it seems to me that the moderation is much more likely to take action against those pointing out the trolls are trolls than against the trolls themselves.

If you can't say to others on a topic "Look, he's a troll. Stop replying" or anything similar, then you just see the conversation swerving away from what was under discussion to a series of back and forth insults between troll and others.

1 hour ago, Greg said:

Also note, this is NOT a paid gig, we're not nor will we ever be, paid moderators; so you can't expect 100% coverage of all threads and topics.

I"m pretty sure everyone appreciates it. And I'd volunteer to help but I know you think I'm too biased (though there is no one here unbiased)

[Greg]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

I am not ONE bit surprised that this is still a problem on this board

This is an issue with all forums (offline and online); even more so with forums focused on politics and ideology. 

I'm sure even a knitting forum would have it's own brand of troll...

However, I don't want to be perceived as too defeatist, but in the end there is NO solution.  As in life, the complete elimination crime/evil is impossible.  All we can do it try to keep the annoying and sometimes destructive human behaviours (in ourselves and others) at a minimum.

1 hour ago, Argus said:

the moderation is much more likely to take action against those pointing out the trolls are trolls than against the trolls themselves

That could be, I'm not 100% certain (it's difficult to get the context to every incident in the forums) - but I do believe it has something to do with what I said above about certain members reporting "trolling" behaviour, and then going back in and repeatedly feeding the troll.

1 hour ago, Argus said:

I"m pretty sure everyone appreciates it.

I know, and I hate to even bring it up, as it makes it seem like we're whining about having to do that job - Charles and I don't anyone to think we don't enjoy moderating the community.

We enjoy it, otherwise we would not do it.

1 hour ago, Argus said:

And I'd volunteer to help

And I will may take up that offer in the near future.  The next iteration of the forum will likely have a slightly modified approach to moderation.  It will hopefully involve the efforts of senior members (i.e. long time members) input into flagging spam and inappropriate postings/members.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Greg said:

I'm sure even a knitting forum would have it's own brand of troll...

I was on a knitting forum once.  There wasn't a lot of blatant trolling, but there was a lot of unnecessary needling...

Edited January 6, 2019 by bcsapper

[betsy]

On 1/5/2019 at 8:47 PM, Argus said:

An excellent response!

Except that in most cases there is no noticeable impact from such reporting. So after a while you stop reporting except in the most obvious, blatant cases.

 

Well, maybe only the most blatant ones should be reported.   If it isn't blatant trolling, it's open to interpretation.....otherwise, it'd be blatant!

Like, I don't see the bragging posts about the USA as "trolling"..... after all there is indeed an attitude among some Canadian posters to belittle the US President.   Our own Justin Trudeau had done so (doing a bitchy snide swipe) at every opportunity he got.   In fact, he's been pontificating to other nations about the "values" of Canada, which apparently is now grating among Canadians (according to pundits on Question Period)!  Lol.   If this "holier-than-thou" is getting on the nerves of Canadians - imagine how it must be for other world leaders!

This is a political forum.  The "bragging" is political.

 

It is personal attacks that are the serious crimes in a forum.   Trolling, not so much......

 

 

And please, I don't want the mods to be deleting posts just because someone reported it as "trolling."   That's what's happening to some forums (including the one started by smallC).   It doesn't fly.  Those are the forums that eventually  end up getting really dead.

Edited January 7, 2019 by betsy

[Charles Anthony]

Folks, 

I will repeat.  If you believe somebody is violating the forum rules, report it and ignore it.  In your report, tell us what you want us to do -- you might be right.  For instance: 

"This post violates the forum rules because <INSERT WHATEVER REASON HERE> and I want MODERATION to

1) privately warn this member to refrain from doing this again 

2) publicly warn this member to refrain from doing this again 

3) delete this post 

4) permanently ban this member from the forum

5) temporarily suspend this member for <INSERT DURATION HERE> 

6) some combo-permutation of the above 

7) SOMETHING ELSE ." 

Copy-paste this text, fill in the blanks and cast your ballot. 

[GostHacked]

38 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

Folks, 

I will repeat.  If you believe somebody is violating the forum rules, report it and ignore it.  In your report, tell us what you want us to do -- you might be right.  For instance: 

"This post violates the forum rules because <INSERT WHATEVER REASON HERE> and I want MODERATION to

1) privately warn this member to refrain from doing this again 

2) publicly warn this member to refrain from doing this again 

3) delete this post 

4) permanently ban this member from the forum

5) temporarily suspend this member for <INSERT DURATION HERE> 

6) some combo-permutation of the above 

7) SOMETHING ELSE ." 

Copy-paste this text, fill in the blanks and cast your ballot. 

Wait, so you are asking us to tell you what do be done about the poster?  Can't you make a decent decision based on what is reported? If not, maybe we should consider new moderation on the board.

[Charles Anthony]

7 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Wait, so you are asking us to tell you what do be done about the poster? 

No.  I am telling complainers to tell us what they want moderation to do about a perceived infraction.  

 

7 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Can't you make a decent decision based on what is reported?

Yes.   

I have to decide what to do with frivolous reports too.   

[GostHacked]

38 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

No.  I am telling complainers to tell us what they want moderation to do about a perceived infraction.  

 

Yes.   

I have to decide what to do with frivolous reports too.   

So people who report trolls are 'complainers' ? This tells me more about your moderation style than the posts being reported.  But telling you what we want done is also not our job as posters, that is yours as a moderator. But let's say I do report one and tell you want should be done about it,  would you still reply in a private message to me that I am 'free to ignore the trolls' ?? 

[Charles Anthony]

I aint asking anybody to do my job. Rather, I am hopng that complainers offer at least an iota of their thinking process so that I may be able to respond to them in terms that they may comprehend. 

 

36 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

But let's say I do report one and tell you want should be done about it,  would you still reply in a private message to me that I am 'free to ignore the trolls' ?? 

That depends on whether your report contains profanity or not.  

If I agree with your report and your recommendation, then I will likely do exactly as you ask.   

If I disagree with your report or and your recommendation and your communication is polite, then I will likely send you a PM explaining how and why I decide to handle it. 

[GostHacked]

24 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

I aint asking anybody to do my job. Rather, I am hopng that complainers offer at least an iota of their thinking process so that I may be able to respond to them in terms that they may comprehend. 

That means you are also asking us to define what is trolling for you.  That's pretty sad.

24 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

 

That depends on whether your report contains profanity or not.  

Profanity or not, I know for a fact you disregarded many of my 'complaints' for a poster who is an obvious troll.

24 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

If I agree with your report and your recommendation, then I will likely do exactly as you ask.   

IF you agree,, meaning it's all arbitrary.

24 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

If I disagree with your report or and your recommendation and your communication is polite, then I will likely send you a PM explaining how and why I decide to handle it. 

Right, like you did to me regarding a post I reported , the response was 'you are free to ignore the trolls'.  I am sure I can screenshot that from my msgs. And I end up getting a two week ban for pointing that out. The profanity you received in a private message was deserved.

[Charles Anthony]

7 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

That means you are also asking us to define what is trolling for you. 

No. 

[GostHacked]

47 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

No. 

So you DO know what is trolling then, correct?

 

[Charles Anthony]

14 hours ago, GostHacked said:

So you DO know what is trolling then, correct?

Yes.

[GostHacked]

9 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

Yes.

What do you do about it?

[Charles Anthony]

2 hours ago, GostHacked said:

What do you do about it?

I read what folks post and appreciate every learning opportunity I get. 

 

I review every report. 

 

I decide if a report is valid.  

HINT:  trolling ≠ somebody expressing disagreement  

If 99% of the relevant post conforms with the forum rules and 1% breaks the law, then I tend to send a private message to the violator. 

If I disagree with the report and the report is sincere, I usually send a message to the reporter saying so. 

If I disagree with the report and the report is obviously a veiled attempt to censor a fellow member, I usually ignore the report. 

If I disagree with the report and I am not certain of the reporter's intent, I tend to send a private message to the reporter asking for an explanation.  If the reporter trolls me in reply, then I try to set an example by ignoring trolling. 

 

I decide if the relevant post requires censorship. 

HINT:  If 99% of the members participating in the discussion have demonstrated their intent to ignore what is perceived to be trolling, then I choose to go with the democratic flow.  

If 1% of the relevant post conforms with the forum rules and 99% breaks the law, then I tend to take down the post.  Before taking down anything, I re-read the thread to get context. 

If somebody quotes a post that I believe should be censored, then I tend to leave everything up provided that the quotation is done with the intent of keeping the discussion civil.  If somebody quotes a post that I believe should be censored with the intent of feeding more uncivil discussion, then I censor off-topic derailment. 

 

Repeat infractions usually warrant much more draconian censorship.  That is the short version.

 

On 1/7/2019 at 7:09 AM, betsy said:

And please, I don't want the mods to be deleting posts just because someone reported it as "trolling."  

Neither do I but unfortunately, censorship is the only tool. 
I am a reader just like everybody else.  I do not know everything.  I learn new stuff too from you guys just like everybody else does.   The last thing I want to do is to inadvertently censor members if it can be avoided.  

HINT:  I would rather somebody stop violating the forum rules than to be banned. 

 

The Question: 

If 50% of your post furthers the discussion and the other 50% violates the forum rules, is it moderator bias/censorship to delete your post?

[GostHacked]

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

I read what folks post and appreciate every learning opportunity I get. 

 

I review every report. 

 

I decide if a report is valid. 

HINT:  trolling ≠ somebody expressing disagreement  

If 99% of the relevant post conforms with the forum rules and 1% breaks the law, then I tend to send a private message to the violator. 

If I disagree with the report and the report is sincere, I usually send a message to the reporter saying so. 

If I disagree with the report and the report is obviously a veiled attempt to censor a fellow member, I usually ignore the report. 

If I disagree with the report and I am not certain of the reporter's intent, I tend to send a private message to the reporter asking for an explanation.  If the reporter trolls me in reply, then I try to set an example by ignoring trolling. 

So it's an arbitrary decision by you.

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

 

I decide if the relevant post requires censorship. 

Again, arbitrary decision by you and not according to any forum rule.

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

HINT:  If 99% of the members participating in the discussion have demonstrated their intent to ignore what is perceived to be trolling, then I choose to go with the democratic flow.  

If a post is being ignore by members, how can you tell that the post being ignored as trolling?   You can't.

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

If 1% of the relevant post conforms with the forum rules and 99% breaks the law, then I tend to take down the post.  Before taking down anything, I re-read the thread to get context. 

So it's the amount of trolling and not the act of trolling itself?  Come on.

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

If somebody quotes a post that I believe should be censored, then I tend to leave everything up provided that the quotation is done with the intent of keeping the discussion civil.  If somebody quotes a post that I believe should be censored with the intent of feeding more uncivil discussion, then I censor off-topic derailment. 

 

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

 

Repeat infractions usually warrant much more draconian censorship.  That is the short version.

Neither do I but unfortunately, censorship is the only tool.

The real answer is a BAN. Something you seem very hesitant to do.

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

I am a reader just like everybody else.  I do not know everything.  I learn new stuff too from you guys just like everybody else does.   The last thing I want to do is to inadvertently censor members if it can be avoided.  

HINT:  I would rather somebody stop violating the forum rules than to be banned. 

How's that working out for you?

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

The Question: 

If 50% of your post furthers the discussion and the other 50% violates the forum rules, is it moderator bias/censorship to delete your post?

Right, so in the end you really have no idea and are very inconsistent with how you address trolling.  That's always been the problem here. Members know it, you damn well know it. But ...

 

This is why reporting posts is 100% useless based on your responses.

[Charles Anthony]

35 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

So it's an arbitrary decision by you.

Correct but everything is arbitrary at its finest. I try to see the good in all of you.

If you want somebody permanently censored from the forum, then file a report with a reason. Alternatively, you could start a poll in the Clubs sub-forum to see who agrees with you.  

 

For what it is worth, I am proud of the diversity of opinion and discussion that exists here.   I learn something new every day and for that I am grateful.  "Diversity is our strength!" 

Folks who have trouble ignoring whatever they want censored and who want help understanding the logic of moderation should look at whatever they perceive to be "trolling" in the same way as they would themselves deal with something that is otherwise simply "boring" in real life. 

[GostHacked]

35 minutes ago, Charles Anthony said:

Correct but everything is arbitrary at its finest. I try to see the good in all of you.

If you want somebody permanently censored from the forum, then file a report with a reason. Alternatively, you could start a poll in the Clubs sub-forum to see who agrees with you. 

For what it is worth, I am proud of the diversity of opinion and discussion that exists here.   I learn something new every day and for that I am grateful.  "Diversity is our strength!" 

Folks who have trouble ignoring whatever they want censored and who want help understanding the logic of moderation should look at whatever they perceive to be "trolling" in the same way as they would themselves deal with something that is otherwise simply "boring" in real life. 

The inability to deal with trolls and shit posters only causes yourself more problems when you actually decide to do something about it.

That is what I see as your problem with your approach to moderation.  I constantly see you asking people (the same people) to not make personal attacks, but as you know that warning gets ignored. Again creating more of a problem for you because you have set this kind of precedent a long time ago. And then you lock threads when that happens.

Pick up that ban-hammer and slam it down when needed.  And if that means I am on the list for banning,  then do so.

Also part of your process is to let people know when their post gets removed. but I can tell you with 100% certainty that you don't do that all the time.

 

[eyeball]

On 6/7/2018 at 6:28 AM, GostHacked said:

I am no troll, but I will tell you exactly what I mean. The main problem that people have with my posts is because they cannot read or really comprehend what is being put forth.

Sure they can, they simply don't want too.

THAT's real baiting, with a capital B.

[GostHacked]

13 hours ago, eyeball said:

Sure they can, they simply don't want too.

THAT's real baiting, with a capital B.

Yep. And I noticed anther thread locked by Charles today. He does not like to censor, but will simply end up locking the thread instead of throwing down some suspensions or bans.

I am also really curious about the new batch of users. Very suspect to me.

[Charles Anthony]

Thanks for challenging me.  The moral of the story is that you want me to be more strict.  OK.  I will be more strict. 

 

To the newer members, I urge you to do your best to keep discussions on-topic and focussed.  I know it is not easy.  I know it can be unnatural.  Do your best. 
Avoid initiating and participating in personal banter.  Try to direct your writing towards the reader who discovers the forum for the 1st time.  If your reader must know any member's username to be able to understand your entire post, then your post is too personal. 

If a few of you want to discuss personal stuff then that is fine but create your own thread in the Clubs sub-forum down below. 

[GostHacked]

1 hour ago, Charles Anthony said:

Thanks for challenging me.  The moral of the story is that you want me to be more strict.  OK.  I will be more strict. 

Not more strict, just abide by the rules you put out as a moderator and be consistent about it. THAT has ALWAYS been the issue with your approach to moderation. And I am just making sure YOU abide by the rules YOU set out.  That also results in members losing respect and faith in you as a moderator.

 

 

 

 

[Charles Anthony]

Send Greg and myself a personal message.